Why the mainstream?

[veronica_rich]

Many of us reading this right now are obsessive little fangirls (and some fanboys) - let's face it, we wouldn't belong to a POTC LiveJournal community if we weren't. We are probably the type who are or have been fans of "Star Trek" or "Star Wars" or various and sundry other sci-fi/fantasy/paranormal (Helllllllo, Mulder!) franchises over time. We're considered "fringe" and outside the mainstream.

Fair enough. I've been that way since 1992, LOL.

My discussion question today is this: What about those people who are NOT going to see POTC or its sequels in theaters 5 or 10 times for discussion and analysis and fanfic-writing points? "Dead Man's Chest" has raked in over $500 million worldwide in only 17 days; by comparison, "The Da Vinci Code" has only taken in about $525 million during its entire run so far - and THAT was a highly anticipated, controversial movie.

Why do you think "mainstream" people are seeing this movie? And do you think it's making its money mostly off of us "fringe" diehard fans, or are there more people just going to see this than normally go see movies, period? Is it because all ages (including little kids who probably shouldn't be in the theater) are going to it? Is "Pirates," in fact, the new "Star Wars?"

Or do people just really love Keith Richards THAT much? ;-)

Comments

[chibikat-wtf.livejournal.com]

I think Johnny Depp is a major draw. He did something creative and incredibly different in the first one, which brought an entirely new charisma to the film - he made Pirates into a shebang! when, in truth, it should've just been a meh? He created a character in the middle of all the action, keeping the "Yay, explosions!", "Ooh, characterization...", "But what does this crazy, mixed-up, work-a-day life all mean?", and "I HEART ADVENTURE" crowds appeased.

There's both humour and pathos in the film, and it's an adventure epic. Considering the utter drought of goodness in the movie industry lately, people have caught on to the fact that this is A Good Movie - people love the cinema, but they hate paying money for a movie they're not sure is going to pan out. Since the first one was so fantastic (and they took a gambit on it already), you can almost be guaranteed that the second Pirates is gonna be good.

Then, there's us - the fringe, as you call it. Pirates has enough of the fantastic to appeal to the sci-fi/fantasy crowd, yet good enough writing to also offer something to those looking for more than just the mainstream. Beneath the layers of money-fuelled sets, explosions, and (now) big-name actors, there's also something that hasn't been done before, which intarweb geekz immediately cling to. We are different; we want something different. Pirates, simply put, is different.

Most importantly, Pirates is an escape world, a nigh-romantic vision of a time when adventure was free. In our time, it seems everything has been explored, everything's been done...and there are so many goddamn government sanctions, rules, and regulations (all enforced by the police and/or military), we crave a taste of freedom in this generation of war and politics. Pirates are rebels, heeding only the sea and their own souls - sometimes for better, sometimes for worse, but always with exciting (and sexy!) results.

Star Wars had the galaxy to conquer; Pirates has the sea. We all just want an adventure, whether we're "mainstream" or not, and Pirates offers that...brilliantly, though, as opposed to many other movies that have come out in the past decade or so.

/babbling

[philosophercat.livejournal.com]

*points* What you said. ;)

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

Hmm. Those are all good points and I can't disagree with any of them. I think it boils somewhat down to the simple notion that it was new, and good, and different - Jack Sparrow is not an existing comic book hero, or anti-hero, or anything really.